SENATE UNIT ASKS CURB ON SECRECY

WASHINGTON, March 2—A Senate Judiciary subcommittee unanimously approved today law changes designed to curtail drastically the Government's power to withhold information from the public.

It would eliminate as reasons for suppressing documents, re­ports and_ activities such stand, ards as "in the public interest" and "for good causes."

A much more restrictive for­mula would be substituted. Se­crecy would be limited to mat­ters involving national security, foreign policy and a few situa­tions found to justify exemp­tion.

The subcommittee, headed by Senator Edward V. Long, Dem­ocrat of Missouri, found that the reasons for withholding in­formation were defined so broadly that they became ex­cuses for suppressing informa­tion to which the public and the the press were obviously entitled.

In "innumerable" instances, the panel stated, the legal ex­emptions from a law designed to implement a policy of dis­closure were used to cover up embarrassing mistakes, irregu­larities or other actions lacking, the right of secrecy.

The amending legislation, sent to the parent Judiciary Committee, is aimed at Section 3 of the Administrative Proce­dure Act of 1946, where the loop­holes were found.

"We should not kid our­selves," Mr. Long said. "There is

The bill Is co‐sponsored by 15 Democrats and five Republicans. It focuses on what should be published in the Federal Register for public review and on agency opinions, orders, rules, records and proceedings.

In its hearings, the panel found that some reports and documents not related to nation­al security or foreign policy deserved secrecy. One principal item was reports of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which have been in controversy in the case of Robert G. Baker, former secretary to the Senate major­ity.

It has been charged that F.B.I. reports critical of a wit­ness against Mr. Baker had been released by high Administra­tion sources for publication. Exemption from disclosure was also found to be justified for investigative reports from other agencies that involved in­dividuals, internal personnel rules and practices, and "trade secrets" that were obtained con­fidentially from business con­cerns.

The subcommittee measure would allow an aggrieved per­son or group to bring action in district court to force the re­lease of information. If the court upheld the suit, the agen­cy involved would pay the costs of the complainant, including a reasonable fee for the at­torney.

"Any Government official,” the subcommittee said, "under color of law can withhold al­most anything from any citizen under the vague standards—or more precisely. lack of stand­ards—in Section 3."

"For the great majority of different records," It declared, "the public as a whole has a

"There is, of course, a certain right to privacy and a need for confidentiality in some aspects of Governument operations, and these are protected as specifi­cally as possible; but outside these limited areas, all citizens have a right to know."